Mr Clegg, the leader of the Liberal Democrat Party which is the junior partner in the UK Coalition government with David Cameron's Conservatives, said that the Conservatives had been 'fixated' on meeting the commitment to reduce immigration to below 100,000 annually and that this had made it harder for the government to tackle problems in the UK's immigration system.

However, he added 'Thankfully the Conservatives have now softened their attachment to the net migration target and backed away from 'tens of thousands' – omitted entirely, for example, from the Prime Minister's immigration article [in The Daily Telegraph] last week.'

Commitment

The 'tens of thousands' commitment was first made In January 2010 when Mr Cameron was leader of the opposition, when he appeared one Sunday Morning on the Andrew Marr Show on BBC television, a political chat show.

Mr Cameron promised that, if he was elected Prime Minister, he would reduce net immigration into the UK from the then level of over 250,000 per year to 'tens of thousands' a year by the time of the next election in 2015.

However, following the general election of 2010 in which the Conservatives entered into Coalition with the Liberal Democrats, many will be surprised to know, that the 'tens of thousands' pledge was never adopted as Coalition Government policy.

Nick Clegg described the promise as 'a fallacy' which did not provide a proper test of the government's success in limiting immigration.

Fallacy

On Tuesday 5th August, Mr Clegg made a speech in London in which he said 'I made sure the 'tens of thousands' pledge wasn't in the Coalition Agreement because it's unrealistic; because it's based on a fallacy: if a million Brits leave and a million migrants come you get net migration of zero – does that mean you've done the job?'

Net annual immigration is calculated by firstly taking the number of people who arrived in the country as migrants over a given year (immigrants) and then subtracting from this figure the number of people who leave the country as migrants over the same period (emigrants). The difference is the net immigration figure.

So, as Mr Clegg points out, the promise to reduce the net immigration figure does not necessarily mean very much. It does not necessarily mean that you have reduced the levels of immigration into the UK.

Policy

Mr Clegg said that the target had actually got in the way of implementing effective immigration reform. However now, with the target being scrapped, Mr Clegg hopes to focus on a more realistic immigration policy.

In fact, until recently, few people realised the distinction between Conservative Policy and government policy. The Home Secretary and the Immigration minister are in the Conservative Party and since 2010 have taken steps to reach the 'tens of thousands' target.

But, last year, the Liberal Democrat Business Secretary Vince Cable said that the 'tens of thousands' policy was a Conservative, not a Coalition, policy. Now, with the next election approaching, Mr Clegg wants to make the distinction clear again in the hope of electoral advantage.

Mr Clegg also attacked the Labour Party's record on immigration. He said that the Coalition had from the previous Labour government inherited an immigration system which was 'in utter disarray.'

Hypocrisy

Since Mr Clegg spoke, the chairman of the Conservative Party, Grant Shapps MP, has attacked Mr Clegg's 'hypocrisy.' Mr Shapps says that the government does intend to reduce immigration to below 100,000 per year.

He told The Daily Mail paper, 'The surprising thing about it is that he has never raised any of these concerns that I am aware of privately over the last few years. What's more, he has actively blocked several of the common sense straightforward assessments... he's stood in the way of those things happening - for example blocked our calls to rein in EU migration.'

'It's very strange. You would have thought even in the background, in private you might have heard some of these things. I thought it was an extraordinary speech to make.'

If the 'tens of thousands' target remains Conservative (or perhaps government) policy, then things are not going very well. The government has introduced numerous measures over the last four years to cut immigration. By 2013, it had had some success and net immigration had fallen by about 100,000 annually to just over 150,000 annually.

But, since then, immigration has actually risen. The latest figures show that net immigration in the year to March 2014 was 212,000; only 40,000 less than at the last election. Some migration experts predict that the next figures might be even higher, virtually back to the levels under Labour.

Thursday, September 25, 2014

The Indian outsourcing firm Infosys is being sued for discrimination in a US court. The case revolves around Infosys' use of H-1B 'specialty occupation' non-immigrant (temporary residence) visas. Infosys denies any wrongdoing.

The case was brought by Layla Bolten, a US national and an experienced IT professional with a degree in computer science. Ms Bolten was hired by Infosys in 2010 after President Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (commonly known as 'Obamacare') was passed by Congress in 2010. She was employed to work as a tester on the new IT systems required for its implementation.

Discrimination

According to Computerworld magazine, Ms Bolten claims that, at her place of work, she was one of only three US citizens. All the other staff, she says were South Asians. She claims that she suffered discrimination; she was unable to understand conversations which were held in Hindi and she faced harassment because she was not an Indian.

Ms Bolten is one of four US citizens suing Infosys for 'discrimination by national origin.' They say that South Asians, specifically Indians were hired in preference to American workers. The court case is only in its infancy; however Infosys have made an application to have the case struck out on legal and technical grounds.

Ethnic background

Computerworld reports that data collated by the federal government shows that Infosys has 59 offices with 50 or more employees in the US. Workplaces with more than 50 employees are required to provide a breakdown of the ethnic background of all employees.

Of the 59 Infosys offices for which data is available, there were 21 workplaces (about 36%) where one hundred percent of employees were south Asian. At 53 of the 59 sites, it was found that at least 94.5% of employees were South Asian. The lowest proportion of Asians at any of the sites was 74%.

American unions claim that firms, particularly the large outsourcing firms, use H-1B visas to cut costs. They claim that H-1B workers are paid less than US workers who are priced out of jobs by South Asians who are prepared to work for less than the going rate.

The outsourcing companies deny this. They claim that it costs more to bring a worker from India than to employ an American. They say that the reason for employing foreign workers with H-1B visas is that there are not enough American workers with the right skills.

Reform

An immigration reform bill that has been passed by the Senate will, if it ever becomes law, will increase the number of H-1Bs available but will at the same time limit the number of H-1B staff that a particular firm can employ.

The Border Security, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Modernization Act was drafted by eight Senators early in 2013. The bill will reform many areas of the US immigration system.

If the bill becomes law it would make several changes to the H-1B system. It would increase the number of H-1B visas available from 65,000 to more than 180,000. But it would also introduce measures to limit the use of H-1B visas by 'H-1B dependent firms.' The bill will try and restrict foreign staff at any workplace with H-1B visas or L1-Intra Company transfer visas by bringing in the following measures;

A firm with over 50 employees would pay a $5,000 (compared to $190 now) fee for each extra H-1B visa if its staff comprised between 30 and 50% workers with H-1B visas and L-1 visas.

Firms with over 50 employees would pay a $10,000 fee for each extra H-1B visa if its staff comprised over 50% H-1B and L-1 visa holders.

Firms with over 50 employees whose staff comprised 75% or more H-1B and L-1 visa holders would be barred from applying for any more H-1B visas at all.

This has become a bone of contention between the US and Indian governments. In March this year, the new Indian ambassador to the US, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, said that, were the US to introduce the changes, then 'tomorrow if an American company comes and says, 'You know, we've got this set of problems,' the temptation for me is to say, 'I'm out for lunch.'

Fortunately for US-Indian relations, the current gridlock in the US Congress, with Republicans and Democrats unable to agree on anything at all, means that the Act is very unlikely to be passed by the House of Representatives, the lower House of Congress. It will probably not, therefore, become law.

Last year, Infosys settled an action brought by the US government for alleged abuse of the B1 visa. The US government alleged that Infosys staff were working in the US on B1 visa; in some circumstances this is actually allowed.

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

The Australian immigration system is said to be in disarray, after documents leaked last month show that the system has been subject to widespread fraud for a number of years.

The documents, which were leaked to Fairfax, one of Australia's largest media companies, paint a picture of a system which has been virtually destroyed by budget cuts and privatisation. According to one report, the investigations department has been so deskilled that it is unable to investigate fraud any more.

Warnings Ignored

The reports state that immigration staff have repeatedly raised concerns about fraud within the system, however these concerns have been ignored.

Immigration experts say that the Australian government has spent so much of its resources trying to prevent migrants from Asia from reaching Australia by boat that migrants who come via plane, can make fraudulent applications with virtual impunity.

Fraud

An internal audit carried out in 2012 showed that 90% of applications from Afghanistan are in some way fraudulent. It is unlikely that the situation has improved since then. The report states that this poses 'people smuggling, identity fraud, suspected child trafficking and national security implications.'

Another internal investigation carried out in 2009 found that New Zealand and Australian citizens of Somali ethnicity were engaged in a widespread scam which involved them allowing other Somalis to travel on their passports. The report suggests that money raised this way may have been used to fund the Somali Islamist terror organisation Al-Shabab.

Operation Blueberry

Over the past few years Australian immigration auditors have carried out a number of investigations into fraud which suggest that up to 90% of skilled migration visa applications may be fraudulent.

The first of these investigations, Operation Blueberry, conducted in 2006 found that over half of General Skilled Migration stream applications were probably fraudulent.

Operation Blueberry 2 conducted in 2007 found that 22% of references provided in support of skilled migration visa applications were false or misleading. Blueberry 2 also found that a bank manager had been bribed to help applicants obtain visas by providing them with fraudulent documentation to show that they had sufficient funds in their bank accounts to support themselves upon arrival in Australia. This is one of the requirements for certain visa categories in Australia.

Another investigation into the skilled migration system in 2009 found that hundreds of people who were clients of a dishonest immigration agent provided false or misleading references about their work experience which was then used to make visa applications.

Education

A 2009 report into visa fraud in the education industry found similar levels of fraud. The Immigration department audited seventeen colleges and found that none of them complied fully with the rules.

At seven, there was significant visa fraud taking place. Many 'students' enrolled at the colleges, mainly from India and Pakistan, were not genuine students but were in Australia working illegally.

Sievers Report

Perhaps most seriously for Australian immigration, a 2013 report known as the Sievers report found that Australian immigration's capacity to investigate immigration fraud has been all but destroyed by poor management and cost-cutting.

The Sievers Report says that there were already serious problems with the investigations department in 2006 but that the situation has become even worse since then. This the report says is because of redundancies and also due to many staff leaving the service, having become disillusioned with the way the department was being managed. This means the capacity to complete any investigative work has been greatly reduced.

Reforms

Immigration minister Scott Morrison has said that the allegations are serious and has asked for a report from his staff. He pointed out that the allegations all relate to the time before the current Coalition government took power.

In May 2014, he announced the creation of the Australian Border Force which will be 'technology enabled' and more efficient.

But critics say that the new system will be less efficient because of planned job losses. The Australian media have reported that the situation is likely to get worse because of reforms that Mr Morrison has introduced.

Friday, September 19, 2014

A report written by an Australian academic states that there have been 400,000 jobs created in the Australian economy since 2011 and that migrants who have arrived in the country since that year have taken 380,000 of them; 95% of the total.

The report, Immigration and Unemployment in 2014, is written by Bob Birrell and Ernest Healy of Monash University in Melbourne. Dr Birrell is a long-standing critic of Australia's immigration policy which he says has resulted in a lack of jobs for Australian citizens and residents, particularly the young.

The report says that net immigration into Australia runs at about 240,000 per year, as it has done for some years. This level was set during a boom in the Australian economy and now, Dr Birrell says, it is far too high.

He says 'Successive governments have argued that high migration is beneficial because the migration program is targeting skills not available in Australia' but adds 'This study shows that this is not the case.'

The report gives three explanations for this:

The Shortage Occupation List is out of date

Australia allows people to apply for residence visas if they are skilled in a trade or profession to be found on the Shortage Occupation List (SOL). The report says that this list is out of date. Many professions found on the list are not in short supply and there are Australians who are trained in them who cannot find work. Among these professionals are accountants, nurses and dentists.

Students allowed to stay

Many students who studied at Australia's universities have been allowed to apply for Australian visas 'on favourable terms.' The report claims that students who have skills that Australia does not need have been allowed to stay. Many accountants, for example, have been allowed to stay despite the evidence that there is a surplus of accountants in Australia.

Over half of working migrants move to Australia with visas which require sponsorship by employers. The report claims that in some cases overseas employees are brought in despite there being thousands of Australian residents who are unemployed and qualified to do the work.

However the report has come under much criticism since its publication, especially on the third point. While it is true that many migrants are sponsored by employers, they have to meet certain visa requirements which make it difficult for the employer to employ overseas nationals if there Australian residents available to do the work. Other critics have argued that although immigration to Australia is at a high level, the '95%' claim of the report is highly unlikely.

Visa Churning

In addition, the report states, there are a great many migrants who are in the country and who transfer from one visa to another. For example, many students transfer to tourist visas when their student visa expires. The report says that these people are almost certainly working illegally. 142,000 students got other visas in 2012-13. 28,484 students transferred to tourist visas. This process is described as 'visa churning.'

The report says 'Most of these are likely to be working illegally. These temporary entrants are feeding the ranks of those keen to find an employer to sponsor them for a temporary or permanent employment visa. They are also competing with young Australian resident job seekers for semi-skilled entry level jobs.'

The report recommends that 'Australian resident job seekers are given priority access to the limited number of new jobs being created in Australia.'

Recommendations

The report recommends

A reduction in the numbers of permanent migrants accepted by Australia each year

Only those skilled in occupations which are genuinely in short supply in Australia should be allowed entry to Australia.

A cap on the number of temporary work visas. The number of working holiday makers in particular should be limited

Limits on 'visa churning.'

An increase in the training available to Australian residents if there are skills shortages

The Australian immigration minister has recently asked for more information about abuses in the immigration system after leaked documents suggested that it has been subjected to high levels of fraud with claims that as many as 90% of skilled immigration visas being obtained by fraud in 2010.

Thursday, September 18, 2014

The latest figures from the UK's Office for National Statistics show that the number of foreign-born workers in the UK labour force grew by 170,000 between April and June this year. The number of UK-born workers rose by only 40,000.

The figures were released on 13th August. They show that the total number of workers in the UK's work force climbed to 30,537,000 from 30,431,000 between April and June. Of these, 25,813,000 were British-born and 4,724,000 were foreign-born.

Foreign workers

These statistics also show that the number of foreign workers in the UK has quadrupled since 1997 when fewer than one million foreign workers worked in the country. In the last year, while the number of British born workers employed rose by 2%, the number of foreign-born workers rose by 7%.

A more detailed breakdown of the figures shows that almost all of the increase was made up of EU workers. Workers from the European Union are allowed to live and work in the UK as of right because of the single European labour market.

There are now 1,836,000 workers in the UK who were born in other EU countries. Of these, 787,000 come from the 'old EU' countries that have been members of the union for more than thirty years (Germany, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Ireland, Malta, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Greece, Austria, Denmark, Finland and Sweden).

A8 Countries

A further 861,000 come from the A8 countries which joined the EU in 2004. The A8 countries are a group of eight eastern European countries, formerly part of the Soviet Bloc before the collapse of the Soviet Union. They are Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia and Slovenia.

A further 153,000 come from Romania and Bulgaria, two countries which joined the EU in 2007. When Romania and Bulgaria joined the EU, the British government and most other EU Countries placed 'transitional controls' in place which prevented many Bulgarian and Romanian workers from working in the UK. This was to prevent a sudden influx of workers from coming from the two countries, where wages are much lower than in the UK.

Self-employed workers, highly skilled workers with or without job offers and agricultural workers were allowed entry to the UK even before the end of transitional controls on Bulgarians and Romanians ended in the beginning of 2014. Recent research from Oxford University suggests that these exceptions mean that most Bulgarians and Romanians who wanted to come to work in the UK were able to do so before 2014.

The overall increase of workers from the EU was 89,000 in the three months to June. 12,000 of these came from the 'old EU,' however the majority came from the A8 countries (Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia and Estonia). The number of workers from these countries rose by 59,000 in the three months in question.

Migration Statistics Quarterly Report, August 2014

March 2014

June 2014

Change

Total UK workforce

30,341,000

30,537,000

+196,000

UK workers

25,773,000

25,813,000

+40,000

Foreign workers

4,554,000

4,724,000

+170,000

EU

1,747,000

1,836,000

+89,000

EU14 ('old EU')

775,000

787,000

+12,000

A8 (Poland etc)

802,000

861,000

+59,000

Romania & Bulgaria

140,000

153,000

+13,000

Non EU

2,807,000

2,888,000

+81,000

Africa (exc South Africa)

568,000

625,000

+57,000

South Africa

156,000

128,000

-28,000

Australia & NZ

132,000

145,000

+13,000

India

443,000

434,000

-9,000

Pakistan & Bangladesh

325,000

316,000

-9,000

USA

98,000

102,000

+4,000

Rest of the world

1,084,000

1,119,000

+35,000

The figures suggest that immigration from outside the EU has also been on the rise, with 81,000 workers arriving from non-EU countries. The majority of these came from African nations, but there were also a large proportion of workers arriving from Australia and New Zealand. These figures will be a disappointment for the UK's Coalition government which had promised to cut immigration.

Cuts

The Coalition promised to cut immigration when it came to power in 2010. In January 2010, David Cameron (then the leader of the main opposition Conservative Party, now the Prime Minister at the head of the Coalition) said that immigration had been 'too high' under the previous Labour government. He promised to cut it from its then level (about 250,000 per year) to below 100,000 a year if elected.

In the end, the Conservatives did not win an outright majority in the election; however Mr Cameron became Prime Minister by forming a coalition with the centrist Liberal Democratic Party.

Although the Liberal Democrats did not approve of Mr Cameron's 'tens of thousands' pledge, the government has still tried to meet it. Critics of the pledge criticised it on various grounds such as

It would damage the UK's economy by preventing employers from getting the workers they needed

It was beyond the government's power to meet the promise because EU workers were free to come to the country while the UK remains in the European Union and the European Economic Area.

Nonetheless, the government has tried to meet the 'tens of thousands' target. It has taken various steps to do so, including

Abolishing the Tier 1 (Post Study Work) visa. This visa enabled foreign graduates of UK universities to stay in the UK and work for two years after graduation. They were allowed to work for any employer (including themselves)

Abolishing the Tier 1 (General) visa which allowed 'highly skilled people' (mainly graduates) from around the world to come to the UK and work. The government said that many Tier 1 (General) visa holders were working in low paid jobs in the UK. These workers too, could work for any employer

Introducing a cap of 20,700 on the Tier 2 (General) visa for skilled workers. However, this cap has never actually been reached.

removing the sponsorship licences from 700 colleges which prevents them from sponsoring foreign students from outside the EU for Tier 4 student visas

Preventing UK citizens and permanent residents who earn less than £18,600 a year from bringing foreign born spouses to live with them in the UK.

The government had some early successes, cutting the level of net immigration from 250,000 annually to around 150,000 annually by late 2013 but, since then, the level has risen back above 200,000.

Targets

These latest employment figures show that EU immigration is increasing and that the government cannot meet its target. But they also show that even non-EU employment in the UK continues to rise which suggests that immigration from outside the EU may still be rising too.

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

President Barack Obama is preparing to use his executive powers as President to reform the US immigration system, because of the inability of Congress to pass immigration reform legislation. This is despite the fact that both main political parties the Democrats and Republicans agree that change is necessary.

The President says he will have to make 'tough choices' on immigration. He intends to use his executive powers given the failure of Congress to act. One Republican member of the House of Representatives, Representative Steve King of Iowa, has called on his fellow Republicans to impeach the President if he does.

Congress

Under the US system, Congress passes new laws while the President runs the executive branch which is responsible for implementing and enforcing those laws. Congress also has to approve budgets for the federal government.

For a bill to become law, it must be passed by both houses of Congress, the Senate and the House of Representatives. At present, this hardly ever happens because the Democrats control the Senate and the Republicans who are very anti Obama control the House of Representatives.

In the past even when Congress was evenly split, legislation would pass because the two main political parties would negotiate and offer support to each other's legislation in order to get things moving, meaning that bills would be passed more easily. However, in the last eight years, this cooperation has all but ended, resulting in a stalemate which makes it increasingly difficult to pass any new legislation.

Immigration reform Bill

The Senate passed a comprehensive immigration reform bill in June 2013. It was drafted by four Republicans and four Democrats, known as the Gang of Eight, who came out with what was thought to be a mutually acceptable bill.

The bill was originally drafted to deal with the Republicans' concerns about border security and to deal with all the major immigration problems facing the US. President Obama called it a 'compromise' bill in which no party got everything they wanted.

If it becomes law, the bill will:

Increase spending on border security

Establish a 'pathway to citizenship' for most illegal immigrants. It would take over thirteen years for those who apply to become citizens

Award permanent resident visas (or 'green cards') for foreign students who receive doctorates and PhDs from US universities

Increase the number of H-1B 'specialty occupation' temporary work visas for graduate level work granted each year from 85,000 annually to a maximum of about 200,000 annually

Create a 'w-visa' for low-skilled workers in agriculture and construction

Require US employers to check the employment status of all workers against the E-Verify system before employing them

Executive Powers

Unfortunately, because of the lack of cooperation in Washington today, the Republican speaker of the House, John Boehner, has prevented the immigration reform bill even being presented to the House of Representatives, meaning that there will not even be a vote to decide whether to pass the immigration reform legislation or not. Therefore it stands virtually no chance of becoming law any time soon.

Because of this, Mr Obama is considering what steps he can take to reform the system himself. He announced in July that he had asked the Attorney General to see what options he had. This will mean using his executive powers.

While the President cannot make laws himself, he can change the way that the law is applied by use of executive orders. George Washington issued the first executive order in the eighteenth century and every president since has used these powers.

Constitutional lawyers suggest that there are quite a few options open to Mr Obama and that he is well within his rights to introduce changes to the system.

Reaction

Immigration reform campaigners argue that the President must act now. Frank Sharry of America's Voice, a pro-reform group, says that the president is duty-bound to intervene now that it is clear that Congress will not budge on the issue.

But Congressional Republicans claim that, if he did use his executive powers, the President would be guilty of 'overreaching' his powers. This is why Representative King, and other Republicans such as the House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte of Texas are threatening to commence impeachment proceedings if he does.

All this is testament to the poisonous atmosphere which currently pervades Washington. Since President Obama was elected to the presidency in 2008, Republicans have fought every one of his initiatives tooth and nail.

This is because, during the President's two terms in office, the Republican Party, under the influence of the grassroots Tea Party movement, has moved further to the right. Tea Party Republicans tend to view President Obama with deep suspicion.

Many Tea Party sympathisers see the President as a dangerous left-winger with communist sympathies. Others believe him to be a Muslim who sympathises with the terrorists who destroyed the Twin Towers in 2001. Others still (or more probably the same ones) believe him to have been born abroad, perhaps in Kenya.

If Mr Obama was born abroad this would be extremely serious, were it true, because, according to the US Constitution, only American citizens born within the United States are allowed to become President. The President made his birth certificate publicly available which showed he was born in the US state of Hawaii in 1961. Predictably, those who believe the President to be foreign-born were not convinced and declared it a forgery. The other remarks also make little sense. Mr Obama is obviously not a Muslim. In addition it is unlikely that many Muslims sympathise with the attack on the Twin Towers.

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

The Australian immigration system is said to be in disarray, after documents leaked last month show that the system has been subject to widespread fraud for a number of years.

Warnings Ignored

The reports state that immigration staff have repeatedly raised concerns about fraud within the system, however these concerns have been ignored.

Immigration experts say that the Australian government has spent so much of its resources trying to prevent migrants from Asia from reaching Australia by boat that migrants who come via plane, can make fraudulent applications with virtual impunity.

Fraud

An internal audit carried out in 2012 showed that 90% of applications from Afghanistan are in some way fraudulent. It is unlikely that the situation has improved since then. The report states that this poses 'people smuggling, identity fraud, suspected child trafficking and national security implications.'

Another internal investigation carried out in 2009 found that New Zealand and Australian citizens of Somali ethnicity were engaged in a widespread scam which involved them allowing other Somalis to travel on their passports. The report suggests that money raised this way may have been used to fund the Somali Islamist terror organisation Al-Shabab.

Operation Blueberry

Over the past few years Australian immigration auditors have carried out a number of investigations into fraud which suggest that up to 90% of skilled migration visa applications may be fraudulent.

The first of these investigations, Operation Blueberry, conducted in 2006 found that over half of General Skilled Migration stream applications were probably fraudulent.

Operation Blueberry 2 conducted in 2007 found that 22% of references provided in support of skilled migration visa applications were false or misleading. Blueberry 2 also found that a bank manager had been bribed to help applicants obtain visas by providing them with fraudulent documentation to show that they had sufficient funds in their bank accounts to support themselves upon arrival in Australia. This is one of the requirements for certain visa categories in Australia.

Another investigation into the skilled migration system in 2009 found that hundreds of people who were clients of a dishonest immigration agent provided false or misleading references about their work experience which was then used to make visa applications.

Education

A 2009 report into visa fraud in the education industry found similar levels of fraud. The Immigration department audited seventeen colleges and found that none of them complied fully with the rules.

At seven, there was significant visa fraud taking place. Many 'students' enrolled at the colleges, mainly from India and Pakistan, were not genuine students but were in Australia working illegally.

Sievers Report

Perhaps most seriously for Australian immigration, a 2013 report known as the Sievers report found that Australian immigration's capacity to investigate immigration fraud has been all but destroyed by poor management and cost-cutting.

The Sievers Report says that there were already serious problems with the investigations department in 2006 but that the situation has become even worse since then. This the report says is because of redundancies and also due to many staff leaving the service, having become disillusioned with the way the department was being managed. This means the capacity to complete any investigative work has been greatly reduced.

Reforms

Immigration minister Scott Morrison has said that the allegations are serious and has asked for a report from his staff. He pointed out that the allegations all relate to the time before the current Coalition government took power.

In May 2014, he announced the creation of the Australian Border Force which will be 'technology enabled' and more efficient.

But critics say that the new system will be less efficient because of planned job losses. The Australian media have reported that the situation is likely to get worse because of reforms that Mr Morrison has introduced.

Monday, September 15, 2014

The UK government is considering changes to the tax system which could cost low-paid migrant workers thousands of pounds a year. The changes could mean that some will find it less attractive to come and work in the UK.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, is said to be planning to prevent temporary and seasonal workers from claiming their tax-free personal allowance. This would mean that they would pay tax on all their income.

Under the UK tax system, workers are not required to pay tax on the first £10,000 they earn each year. For low paid foreign workers such as fruit pickers who work for three months and earn about £6,000, this means that they pay no tax at all.

But Mr Osborne is said to be planning to require foreign workers to pay tax on all their earnings. This would mean, for a worker who earned £6,000, that they paid more than £1,000 tax, a considerable dent in their earnings.

Government revenue

The new rules would apply to all workers who are resident in the UK for less than half the year. The Treasury believes that the changes will raise £400m in revenue for the government. The change in the rules would bring the UK system into line with other countries such as the US, Canada and many European countries.

The Treasury is said to believe that the change, as well as raising revenue, will help the UK government to meet its target of reducing immigration to below 100,000 per year. The UK's Prime Minister promised to reduce immigration when he was leader of the opposition before the last election.

In a BBC interview, he said that the net level of immigration under the then Labour government had been too high (it was about 250,000 per year at the time). He said that, if elected, his government would reduce immigration to below 100,000 by the next election in 2015.

So far, things have not been going very well. Net Immigration did briefly fall to 150,000 in 2013 but is now about 210,000. Some experts believe it is likely to rise to close to 2010 levels when the next set of figures is released.

Worse-off

The Treasury estimates that the change to the tax system would also affect 110,000 high paid workers such as professionals and managers from other countries, but many would be able to reclaim the tax loss in the UK against their tax allowances in their home countries, leaving them no worse off.

The changes would have a greater impact on the 250,000 low-paid workers who come to the UK to work for short stints each year. These workers would be unlikely to be able to gain credits in their home countries for UK tax paid because many of them will pay little or no tax in their home countries. This would make coming to work in the UK a less attractive option for them, financially.

A Treasury spokesman said 'we believe that it is reasonable to consider whether non-residents who receive income from the UK are paying a fair share of tax on that income, in this country.'

'The government is seeking views on whether it would be appropriate to restrict the personal allowance to those resident in the UK, or people who have most of their economic connections in the UK, as is the case in many other countries including most of the EU.'

Thursday, September 4, 2014

The UK's prime minister, David Cameron, has announced changes to the UK's immigration system which, he says, are 'a vital part' of his 'long-term economic plan to secure a better future for Britain'.

Mr Cameron wrote a piece in The Daily Telegraph, a UK newspaper, on 28th July 2014, in which he explained to readers the changes to the immigration system already made in the four years since he became prime minister and also provided some details of changes that will be introduced over the next six months.

Mr Cameron said that his government's policies had three main objectives

Clamping down on abuses of the system

Making sure the right people are coming here for the right reasons and

Ensuring the British people get a fair deal'

Main changes

The main changes are

Colleges with over 10% of students found to be 'bogus' to lose licencesAny UK college or educational institution which allows too many bogus students to enrol will have its Tier 4 student visa sponsorship licence removed. A recent investigation by the government found that some colleges and universities were not carrying out sufficiently stringent checks to ensure that prospective students were genuine students. Some colleges were allowing students to enrol and then not ensuring that they attended classes allowing them to remain in the country on their Tier 4 student visas while in many cases working full time. Tier 4 student visa holders must attend classes and study but can work during vacations and for 20 hours per week during term time.

Requiring landlords to check whether tenants are legally in the countryFrom November 2014, UK landlords will be required to check whether prospective tenants are entitled to be in the UK.

Illegal immigrants to be barred from opening bank accountsFrom December, banks will be required to check whether migrants are in the country legally before allowing them to open a bank account.

Allowing courts to deport criminals before immigration appeals are heardFrom this week, many foreign criminals who have committed offences in the UK will be deported to their own countries before immigration appeals are heard. This will only apply to migrants from countries which are considered safe.

Curbing the right to family lifeThe European Convention on Human Rights guarantees all citizens the 'right to family life'. Mr Cameron said that there has been 'abuse' of this clause of the convention. He says 'Too many judges have treated this as an unqualified right. So we have written very clearly into the law that when weighing up these cases, judges must also consider the British public interest too'. He continued 'As far as this government is concerned, the rights of law-abiding citizens come well above the rights of criminals'.

Reducing the amount of time that EU migrants can claim unemployment benefits in the UK from six months to three monthsMr Cameron said that his government intended to lessen 'the magnetic pull of Britain's benefit system'. The government had previously acted to prevent EU migrants from claiming benefits until they had been in the country for three months. Now, not only will they have to wait three months to claim benefits but will only, once eligible, be able to claim benefits for a maximum of three months. Mr Cameron says that this change is likely to save the taxpayer £500,000,000. Some academics have expressed doubts about how much difference the changes will make in practice pointing out that most EU citizens come to the UK to work, not to claim benefits.

UK jobs can no longer be advertised exclusively abroadMr Cameron says that UK employers have been 'hunting out cheap labour abroad while too many young people are out of work'. He said 'we are banning overseas-only recruitment; legally requiring these agencies to advertise in English in the UK'. He added 'In the past, all vacancies advertised in Jobcentre Plus were automatically advertised on an EU-wide job portal. This meant advertising over a million job vacancies across the EU. So we are going to massively restrict this, aiming to cut back the vacancies on this portal by over 500,000 jobs'

'A different kind of Britain'

Mr Cameron wrote in the Telegraph 'This is about building a different kind of Britain – a country that is not a soft touch, but a place to play your part, a nation where those who work hard can get on'.

However, many commentators suggest that these changes are cosmetic and will change little. They say that, in fact, their true purpose is to win Mr Cameron the next election by persuading voters that Mr Cameron is 'tough' on immigration.

Mr Cameron's Conservative Party lost a great deal of support to the anti-EU, anti-immigration UKIP at the European Parliament elections in May. UKIP came first in the election taking 24 of the UK's 73 seats in the parliament and securing 27.5% of the votes cast. Mr Cameron's Conservative Party came third in the election.

UKIP

While it is unlikely that UKIP will do nearly so well in the next national elections, to be held in May 2015, it is possible that enough traditional Conservative voters will vote for UKIP to allow the left-of-centre Labour Party to win several seats from the Conservatives. This could allow Labour to win the election.

Therefore, it seems, Mr Cameron is doing his best to win back those voters with some eye catching immigration initiatives. This theory is supported by the fact that some, at least, of these changes will have little if any actual effect.

All studies show, for example, that European immigrants to the UK do not come to claim benefits.

The proportion of EU citizens in the UK on benefits is far lower than the proportion of UK nationals claiming benefits.